The Influence of Typeface on Students' Perceptions of Online Instructors

Information Systems Education Journal (ISEDJ) 12 (3) ISSN: 1545-679X May 2014

The Influence of Typeface on Students’ Perceptions of Online Instructors

Michelle O’Brien Louch [email protected] Duquesne University

Elizabeth Stork [email protected] Robert Morris University

Abstract

At its base, advertising is the process of using visual images and words to attract and convince consumers that a certain product has certain attributes. The same effect exists in electronic communication, strongly so in online courses where most if not all interaction between instructor and student is in writing. Arguably, if consumers make certain assumptions about a product based on the typeface used on a package, then online students are poised to do the same when they read emails from an online instructor. This pilot study looked at the specific medium of e-mail and how an e- mail’s recipient (student) might transfer his or her perceptions of attributes of three typefaces to attributes of the sender (instructor) of the email. One was a commonly used typeface, and the other two were selected for their dramatic differences from the common typeface. The findings revealed that the participants’ opinions of the sender were highly influenced by the typeface used. In the arena of online education, attention should be given to typeface selection in instructors’ emails to students.

Keywords: Typeface, Online Education, Email, Communication, Font, Teacher-student Interaction

1. INTRODUCTION a page simplifies and ultimately limits the message. Readers “design multiple Consider the act of reading body language. One interconnections” between what they see and watches and listens, giving meaning to both the what they read (Lemke, 2009, p. 300), meaning words spoken and the movements that that the image of the words and how they accompany them. Now consider email. One can function on a page, or the visual rhetoric, only absorb what is on the page. There is no increases in importance when one communicates opportunity for body language; there is only the with an unseen other, as is usually the case in appearance of the text to accompany the online education. meaning of the words. In the typical online post-secondary classroom Written communication represents not only our setting, the instructor and student communicate spoken language but also the emotions and electronically, and with the exception of the use intentions, or the tone, of the message. While of audio or video when available, all of this written words are images that we sometimes communication is written. This electronically- dismiss, preferring to focus on the message’s mediated setting shifts the student’s content, they hold degrees of meaning going communication experience to the visual, forcing beyond a word’s denotation or connotation. him or her to comprehend not only the literal Reducing reading to simply looking at words on message but also construe meaning from the

visual rhetoric of the text itself. As a result, mature, formal, elegant, youthful, and casual online students “get to know” their professors when testing perceptions about them (2006, p. through the visual image of the electronic text 1). They noted that typefaces with both serifs before them. and an even baseline, such as Times New Roman and Georgia, connote stability and 2. TYPEFACE formality. According to Bernard, Mills, Peterson, and Storrer’s 2001 study, these fonts are Typeface, or font, not only conveys the words typically found in business documents with intended but also carries a message of its own Times New Roman being one of the most (Henderson, Geise, & Cote, 2004). Studies popular. Fonts without an even baseline, such consistently show that the visual aspect of a as Comics Sans and Kristen ITC, are called word influences the way that the receiver scripts and tend to be considered casual and processes it. As early as 1923, Poffenberger youthful. Additionally, according to Henderson and Franken determined that fonts have an et al. (2004), natural script typefaces that “atmosphere,” or an air, of the following resemble handwriting are re-assuring to the qualities: “cheapness, dignity, femininity, reader (e.g. Bradley Hand ITC and Freestyle antiquity, nature, and elegance” (p. 314) and Script). concluded that the sender of a message was best served if he or she matched the typeface to In 2003, Brumberger conducted two studies on the readers’ expectations of the product. For whether typeface and text had distinct example, one would advertise luxury items using personalities in readers’ eyes. She determined an elegant calligraphic typeface, while for that people “consistently ascribe particular durable goods would use a no-nonsense, simple personality attributes” to both typeface and font. A typeface’s “atmosphere” refers texts (2003a, p. 213). Brumberger’s study specifically to the “capacity of a typestyle to revealed that readers recognize whether a connote meaning over and above… [what] is typeface is appropriate for a certain situation as linguistically conveyed by words” (Lewis & well as that some typefaces are considered “all- Walker, 1989, p. 243). In short, visual purpose,” which she theorized may be because aesthetics influence a receiver’s comprehension they are seen regularly enough to have become and judgment of the message (Bloch, Brunel, & “generic” (2003b, p. 227). Arnold, 2003; Lewis & Walker, 1989). Given that individuals perceive consistent Mackiewicz’s (2005) analysis of fifteen typefaces’ meanings to typographical features letterforms found that typefaces consistently (Brumberger, 2003a; Poffenberger & Franken, regarded as professional contained similar 1923), any incongruence between the words’ elements, such as straight-edged ending strokes appearance and meaning will affect the reader’s balanced by teardrop lobes (which soften the ability to process the meaning of the message. sharper edges), horizontal crossbars on e’s, Readers consistently employ prior experience serifs, and letters resting on an even baseline. with visual cues of words, e.g. boldface, color, She also noted that typefaces with imperfections size, and typeface or font, to determine the are typically perceived as friendly. These message’s full meaning and emphasis of the “imperfections” consist of broken construction, message (Kostelnick, 1989). Poor visual such as when the loops of the g or a bowl on the images can influence students to interpret an a, are not completely closed. Typeface online instructor’s message differently than the imperfections also include rounded ending instructor intended, ultimately impacting strokes, slanted crossbars on the e’s, and an communication within the course and attitudes uneven baseline where letterforms either dip about the instructor. Effective communication below or sit above (Mackiewicz, 2005). between participants is vital for effective performance in any online culture (Clark & Gibb, 3. ONLINE LEARNING 2006). As noted, the receiver constructs meaning when Typeface Personas presented with written electronic communication. How this meaning is Because typefaces are “credited with creating constructed influences the success or the failure first impressions,” Shaikh, Chaparro, and Fox of that particular communication (Geisler et al., sought to determine whether online fonts have 2001). The level of trust that the receiver has in consistently ascribed personas such as stable,

the sender affects how successful the 575. The other two schools were four-year communication is (Smith, 2008), and that trust private universities, one with about 4,000 is influenced by structure (Dirks & Ferrin, 2001). students, the other with nearly 5,000 students. Structure, in this situation, is defined not only as All three institutions are in the same city in the the formal guidelines within which one operates, Mid-Atlantic. but also is the sense of knowing what to expect from interactions. The sample consisted of 22 females and 30 males (N=52) between the ages of 18 and 48. The instructor’s communications are vital in Ten participants (19%) were students in developing that interpersonal structure because accredited allied health programs at the career his or her behavior greatly determines the college. Forty-two participants (81%) were student’s perception of the course and instructor students in the four-year universities, primarily and influences academic success. The role of in core curriculum courses. Twenty-five the online instructor is little different from an different majors were reported by the instructor in a face-to-face classroom in that participants. there are expectations regarding content delivery and classroom control, though the Instrument online classroom places more responsibility on the student and expects a higher level of self- A web-based survey was designed to gather the direction and motivation. As found by Finn, participants’ perceptions about three typefaces Schrodt, Witt, et al. in 2009, a strong (typeface persona) in an email and their relationship exists between students’ perceptions of the sender using the three perceptions of an instructor and student typefaces (sender persona) in an email. The learning. Part of this perception comes from survey was based on the research instruments “immediacy behaviors,” or communication of Brumberger (2003a, 2003b), Lewis and between the instructor and the student that Walker (1989), Poffenberger and Franken reduces both the social and psychological (1923), and Shaikh et al. (2006), all of whom distance between them (Menzel & Carroll, 1999, conducted studies to understand the reactions p. 32). Online instructors who engage in that typefaces elicit. The three typefaces were immediacy behaviors (e.g. asking the students Times New Roman, Impact, and Kristen ITC: about the course, providing personalized examples, and revealing a sense of humor) have 1) Times New Roman, according to Bernard a higher level of student academic success et al., (2001), is a typeface that suggests a (Arbaugh, 2001). businesslike tone and is neither elegant nor youthful; it lacks a personality. Because of 4. METHODOLOGY its visual harmony or directness, this font is often used by respected companies and in This study sought to learn whether the typeface business documents (Brumberger, 2003a, in an e-mail influences the receiver’s perception Henderson et al., 2004; Shaikh et al., of the sender in cases where there is a lack of 2006). Its effect on immediacy may be body language and prior interpersonal, face-to- neutral. face interaction. An online survey, consisting of one e-mail presented in three typefaces and a 2) Typically considered masculine because forced-choice scale with nine pairs of adjectives of its thick lines, Impact typeface is engaging for rating each typeface was administered to and is considered a “modern” typeface post-secondary students to first rate each (Henderson et al., 2004). It is considered typeface and then rate the sender of the e-mail easy to read and is often found on posters or in each typeface. We sought to explore whether in headlines (Impact Typeface, 2007). an e-mail’s typeface persona would be attributed Because of its heavy tone, it may impede to the sender. The study was IRB approved. immediacy.

Participants 3) Kristen ITC is characterized by an The pilot study convenience sample was drawn uneven baseline and san serif design. Both from three post-secondary schools in which Bernard et al. (2001) and Shaikh et al. instructor colleagues teach that offer both online (2006) noted that Kristen ITC is a friendly and on-ground classes. One was a two-year font best used to convey happiness, career college with an average enrollment of

creativity, and a casual tone. It is often Participants were recruited through personal used for children’s documents. Because of visits to college classrooms of instructor its friendly tone, it may create more colleagues where one of the authors, M.L., immediacy. explained the study and invited students to participate. M.L. read a brief introduction to the The typefaces that we selected were chosen for study then passed around a sign-up sheet to their commonality a well as the distinctive collect volunteers’ e-mail addresses by which to differences in their design. Other than the send the survey link. The 149 volunteers ubiquitous Times New Roman, the other two received the link within 48 hours. Reminder were selected because of their opposing styles emails with the link were sent twice over two to each other, a lightweight script and a heavy weeks. Fifty-two ultimately completed the 10- block, to demonstrate the effect of many similar 15 minute survey. fonts with stark differences from Times New Roman. The electronic survey was presented on Data Analysis a split-screen with the e-mail message on the left and the survey questions on the right so that We decided to collapse the four-point scale to the participants could answer the questions two points because the choice of attributes was while looking at the typeface. After a few either toward one or the other, and the sample demographic questions, the participants viewed size did not allow for finer distinctions in the a neutral, general welcome message from a analysis. There were six data points: Times New fictitious online instructor in three different Roman typeface persona, Times New Roman fonts. The first was in Times New Roman, the sender persona, Impact typeface persona, second in Impact, and the third in Kristen ITC. Impact sender persona, and Kristen ITC The instructor’s name, Dr. Smith, was generic typeface persona and Kristen ITC sender and gender-neutral. The only difference persona. Frequencies for each of the nine between the e-mails was the typeface itself; attributes were obtained. Attributes from the perceptions derived from the name of the open-ended options were collected and grouped instructor, gender, or content of the message by theme, first negative or positive, and then by were minimized. similarity to the nine attributes in the instrument. The relationship between each of A four-point semantic differential scale the typeface personas and the sender personas containing nine paired attributes was used to was analyzed by comparing the frequencies for quantify the participants’ perceptions of the each of the three typefaces’ nine attributes with typefaces and the sender. One adjective of a the sender’s nine attributes on each typeface. contrasting pair (youthful) appeared on the left Written-in adjectives were used to confirm or side of a list and the other (mature) on the right disconfirm the quantitative results. side. In between the adjectives were numerals 1, 2, 3, and 4. Participants selected a numeral 5. RESULTS on the scale indicating their perception of, first, the typeface and then second, of the sender. Times New Roman Typeface The four points were used to force a choice and prevent the selection of “neutral.” The list of For Times New Roman, the typeface was judged adjectives used in the scale came from the polite and consistent by at least three-quarters studies of Shaikh et al. (2006), Brumberger of participants, and attractive, professional, (2003b), and Lewis and Walker (1989). The supportive, youthful, casual, passive, and paired attributes were: Polite — Rude, Mature — feminine by more than half. Senders using Youthful, Formal — Casual, Consistent — Times New Roman were more highly regarded Inconsistent, Supportive — Unsupportive, than was the typeface alone. Perceptions of the Professional — Unprofessional, Attractive — sender who used Times New Roman were Unattractive, Assertive — Passive, Masculine — unequivocal on all attributes, with consistent, Feminine. The instrument also allowed for write- professional, formal, polite, and mature all in attributes through open-ended spaces for receiving at least 90% of the scores. Supportive, participants to add perceptions for each typeface attractive, and assertive were attributes of and each sender’s use of the three typefaces. senders by at least three-quarters of participants. Perceptions of the typeface and Data Collection the sender were most well matched on politeness. Contradictory perceptions of

attributes of the typeface and of the sender were negative, and they were predominantly focused found on four items, with the typeface receiving on behavior, such as brownnoser, compliant, more than 50% of the scores on youthfulness, distant, rule driven, and workaholic. casualness, passivity, and femininity while the sender was overwhelmingly assessed as being Impact Typeface the opposite: mature, formal, assertive, and masculine. Table 1 shows the highest rated For Impact, most participants assessed the adjective of each pair in descending order on the Impact typeface as assertive, masculine, and Times New Roman typeface persona compared consistent. Half judged Impact as rude and with the sender persona using it. unsupportive. The typeface persona was attributed to the sender using it on six of the Typeface Sender nine attributes meaning the typeface persona and sender persona were similarly perceived. Characteristic Senders using Impact were judged much less (N=52) (N=52) polite, somewhat less assertive, and slightly less supportive than was the typeface alone, but more mature, and slightly more formal, Polite 90 94 professional, and attractive. The perception of the typeface and the sender matched most Consistent 75 98 closely on masculine and consistent. Table 2 Supportive 65 85 shows the highest rated adjective of each pair on the Impact typeface persona, in descending Mature 40 90 order, compared with the persona of the sender using it. Formal 40 96 Typeface Sender Professional 58 96 Characteristic (N=52) (N=52) Attractive 56 81

Assertive 44 77 Assertive 83 73 Masculine 38 67 Masculine 77 75 Table 1: Frequencies Comparing Typeface Consistent 67 69 Persona and Sender Persona for Times New Roman, in Descending Order, as Percentage of Supportive 48 42 Total Sample Polite 48 30 In addition to the nine pairs of adjectives for the Mature font and the sender using the font, participants 42 62 who completed the open-ended portion typed in Formal 40 46 adjectives that supported the results of the quantitative section of the survey. For Times Professional 33 38 New Roman, 127 adjectives were provided; 85% conveyed a positive or professional assessment, Attractive 31 35 such as approachable, fair, friendly, normal, Table 2: Frequencies Comparing Typeface polite, and traditional. Only 15% of the Persona and Sender Persona for Impact, in adjectives carried a negative judgment: boring, Descending Order, as Percentage of Total busy, sharp, and weak. Sample

The written-in adjectives to describe the sender The written-in terms participants added again were very similar to those for the typeface. Of supported the quantitative results. Participant- the 99 adjectives describing the sender, 84% provided adjectives for the typeface Impact were were positive or professional, e.g. business-like, 48% negative and primarily described the classy, conservative, formal, honest, intelligent, appearance of the typeface itself, e.g. blob, neat, simple, and white collar. Only 16% were cluttered, dark, hard to read, and thick.

Participant-provided adjectives describing the For Kristen ITC, the written-in adjectives varied. sender were also higher in negativity (53%). There were 121 adjectives provided to describe Like those provided for Times New Roman, the the typeface. Participants described Kristen ITC adjectives provided for Impact focused on the as childish, girly, and welcoming. The sender behavior of the sender, such as arrogant, bossy, was described by 99 participants’ adjectives as cold, egotistical, grumpy, mean, selfish, short- childish, girly, carefree, and glamorous. The tempered, and unapproachable. typeface and sender were also described in unattractive terms. For the typeface, 27% of the adjectives were negative: distracting, messy, sloppy, unattractive, and unlegible [sic]. For the sender, 21% were negative, e.g. ditsy, Kristen ITC Typeface dumb, meek, timid, and unassertive.

Participants viewed both the typeface and the 6. DISCUSSION sender as polite and attractive. The typeface persona of Kristen ITC was perceived as Supporting McLuhan’s decree that the medium is supportive and consistent, but the sender who the message, the role of typeface in electronic used it was judged less so. The sender using communication goes beyond visually displaying Kristen ITC was perceived considerably the sender’s words (1964). Typeface not only differently than the typeface on all the attributes conveys the literal meaning of a message but other than attractive, but in the same order. The also the personality of the sender, which means sender was perceived as youthful, feminine, that the receiver of the message reads the casual, polite, passive, attractive, and physical appearance of the words as well as the unprofessional more dramatically than was the words themselves. typeface itself. Table 3 shows the highest rated adjective of each pair, in descending order, on The online student, relying solely on the the Kristen ITC typeface persona compared with electronic words sent by the instructor, the sender persona using it. construes meaning in the typeface as well as in the words used and attributes certain Typeface Sender personality traits to the sender based on the Characteristic style of the typeface. The instances where the perception of the typeface and sender did not (N=52) (N=52) match on Times New Roman may be because it is so common and, to some participants, has lost visual meaning and is simply a generic font, Polite 81 87 appropriate for all purposes and carrying little weight in terms of influencing perception Attractive 79 81 (Baumberger, 2003b). Participants judged Supportive 73 64 senders as more professional for using a common business-like font, transferring the Consistent 73 50 typeface’s persona more fully to the sender. However, for differences in perception between Professional 46 19 typeface and sender for Kristen ITC, the transference of typeface person to the sender Assertive 45 15 resulted in a less favorable perception of the instructor as a professional, even though Formal 42 11 participants tended to perceive the typeface Mature 38 4 persona rather favorably.

Masculine 21 6 Overall, the results relating to students’ Table 3: Frequencies Comparing Typeface perceptions about Times New Roman support Persona and Sender Persona for Kristen ITC, in previous research regarding the typeface’s Descending Order, as Percentage of Total persona as traditional, non-threatening, and Sample accessible to readers (Henderson et al., 2004; Mackiewicz, 1990; Bernard et al., 2001) This typeface works well as a default typeface for online communication as it allows the receivers

to read the message and experience little opposite of Impact’s harsh tone and Times New negative distraction by the typeface (e.g. being Roman’s professionalism. This typeface does difficult to read due to design qualities or not present itself in a threatening or forceful suggesting a tone that contradicts the message manner, which can influence its being perceived itself). Times New Roman can aid in influencing as more polite and attractive. As with Impact, the receiver as it lacks an aggressive or too- the participants had opinions regarding the playful appearance. In essence, the fact that its appropriateness of this typeface for instructors. design does not create a large amount of visual Participants rated Kristen ITC as too casual and noise means that it allows the receiver to focus unprofessional for it to have the same on the message (Bitzer, 1968). With 73% of the accessibility and the same neutrality as Times participant-provided adjectives describing the New Roman. Like the Impact typeface, the sender as professional, this typeface can appearance of this playful typeface can influence the receiver to accept the message for overpower the sender’s intended message. Two what it is and not for what it appears to be. of the major themes within the participant- provided adjectives, for both sender and With its bolder lines, Impact literally and receiver, were childishness and playfulness, figuratively takes up more space on the page, therefore, senders who need to convey an air of forcing the reader to pay more attention to the authority or send an important message should design. Its fixed pitch, or the spacing between avoid this typeface. the letters, makes the letters appear more cramped together. The participant-provided Limitations adjectives attested to the effect of this typeface’s design in instructor-student Validity issues revolve around the participant communication, as 74% of the adjectives pool, specifically its size and its demographic focused on the negative aspect of the typeface’s make-up. The sample size was small, out of appearance and 70% focused on the negative or 149, only 52 ultimately completed the survey. unprofessional personality of the sender. The Some students started the survey, but failed to Impact typeface, then, creates too much visual complete it. This may be due to the length of noise for the message, changing a neutral the survey, though the time required tocomplete message from a professor into one with an it was roughly 10-15 minutes. Some underlying harsh tone. As with Times New participants completed the survey but, with each Roman, the results for perceptions relating to progressive screen, provided fewer adjectives in the Impact typeface support previous research. the qualitative section, which may be because This typeface, according to the participant- participants were eager to finish and/or lost provided adjectives, is inappropriate for general interest. There is the possibility that the length communications because it comes across as of the email letter, though only eleven sentences abrasive, rude, and demanding. The strongest long, was perceived as being too long. Another theme within the participant-provided adjectives possible limitation is the fact that the sample was negative in tone, thus senders who need to letter contained instructions so the words’ develop a professional and/or positive working meanings may have influenced the participants’ relationship, as instructors do to create a perception of the sender. Finally, not providing successful learning environment, should avoid a neutral option on the semantic differential this typeface. However, in situations where the scale forced the participants to choose between message is brief and important, e.g. Please the adjectives. This pilot study has led to the submit your final papers today!, or when the design of a new study to overcome these message is a headline, e.g. Take a Study Break limitations. at the Café, this typeface is appropriate due to its attention-getting design as well as the fact 7. CONCLUSION that the information is brief and does not visually overwhelm the page. Online students who have a positive sense of their instructors are more likely to do well Unlike the other two typefaces in our study, academically and have a higher level of Kristen ITC possesses a very specific visual satisfaction with their courses (Arbaugh, 2000). connotation to femininity and youthfulness. This study offer evidence of one way in which Combining its rounded design with its historical instructors’ electronic communications can use in communications aimed at children, influence positive student perception of the Kristen ITC has evolved to represent the

instructor and the course, especially in early Dirks, K., & Ferrin, D. (2001). The role of trust interactions. On-line instructors should be in organizational settings. Organizational aware of the effect of choice of typeface when Science, 12 (4), 450-467. communicating with their students. Our study Finn, A., Schrodt, P., Witt, P. E., Jernberg, K., & encourages the design of basic communication Larson, L. (2009). A meta-analytical review guidelines which have been found conducive to of teacher credibility and its associations decreasing miscommunication in virtual settings with teacher behaviors and student (Remidez, Stam, & Laffey, 2007; Hsu & Chou, outcomes. Communication Education, 58 2009; Clark & Gibb, 2006). Using these results (4), 516-537. as a guide for typeface will prove useful for those in academia who want to ensure that the Geisler, C., Bazerman, C., Doheny-Farina, S., visual rhetoric of their message does not distort Gurak, L., Haas, C., Johnson-Eilola, J., et al. the meaning of the message. (2001). IText: Future directions for research on the relationship between information 8. REFERENCES technology and writing. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 15 (3), 269- Arbaugh, J. (2000). Virtual classroom 308. characteristics and student satisfaction with Henderson, P. W., Giese, J. L., & Cote, J. A. internet-based MBA courses. Journal of (2004). Impression management using Management Education, 24 (32), 32-54. typeface design. Journal of Marketing, 68, Arbaugh, J. (2001). How instructor immediacy 60-72. behaviors affect student satisfaction and Heo, M. (2009). Design considerations for learning in web-based content. Business today's online learners: A study of Communication Quarterly, 64 (4), 42-54. personalized, relationship-based social Bernard, M., Mills, M., Peterson, M., & Storrer, awarenes information. International Journal K. (2001). A comparison of popular online of E-Learning, 8 (3), 293-311. fonts: Which is best and when? Usability Hsu, J.-L., & Chou, H.-W. (2008). The effects of News, 3 (2). communicative genres on intra-group Bitzer, L. (1968). The rhetorical situtation. conflict in virtual student teams. Philosophy and Rhetoric, 1, pp. 1-14. International Journal of Distance Education, 7 (1), 1-22. Bloch, P. H., Brunel, F. F., & Arnold, T. J. (2003). Individual differences in the Kostelnick, C. (1988). A systematic approach to centrality of visual product aesthetics: visual language in business communication. Concept and measurement. Journal of The Journal of Business Communication, 25 Consumer Research, 29, 551-565. (3), 29-48. Brumberger, E. R. (2003a). The rhetoric of Lemke, J. L. (2002). Visual communication. typography: The persona of typeface and Travels in hypermodality, 1 (3), 299-325. text. Technical Communication, 50 (2), 206- Lewis, C., & Walker, P. (1989). Typographic 223. influences on reading. British Journal of Brumberger, E. R. (2003b). The rhetoric of Psychology, 80, 241-257. typography: The awareness and impact of Mackiewicz, J. (2005). How to use five typeface appropriateness. Technical letterforms to gauge a typeface's Communication, 50 (2), 224-231. personality: A research-driven method. Clark, A. M. (2003). A preliminary investigation Journal of Technical Writing and of student perceptions of online education. Communication, 35 (3), 291-315. Information Systems Education Journal, 1 Menzel, K. E., & L.J., C. (1999). The impact of (36), 1-9. gender and immediacy of willingness to talk Clark, D. N., & Gibb, J. (2006). Virtual team and perceived learning. Communication learning: An introductory study team Education, 48 (1), 21-40. exercise. Journal of Management Education, McLuhan, M. (1962). The Gutenberg galaxy. 30, 764-787. Toronto: Signet Books.

Poffenberger, A., & Franken, R. (1923). A study Shaikh, A. D., Chaparro, B. S., & Fox, D. (2006). of the appropriateness of type faces. Journal Perception of fonts: Perceived personality of Applied Psychology, 7, 312-329. traits and uses. Usability News, 8 (1). Remidez, H., Stam, A., & Leffey, J. M. (2007). Smith, W.S. (2008). Decoding generational Web-based template driven communication difference: Fact, fiction… or should we all support systems: Using shadownet just get back to work? Deloitte workspace to suport trust development in Development, LLC. virtual teams. International Journal of e- Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in Collaboration, 3 (1), 65-83. serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18 (6), 643-662